User talk:SpartHawg948
Welcome Hi, welcome to Encyclopedia Barsoomia Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the User talk:Gnostic page. Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- Ralok (Talk) 09:08, January 18, 2011 :Thanks for the lovely auto-greet. Will do! I may or may not be involved with this wiki, as the reason for my first edit was to clear my name against baseless accusations of "stalking" someone who clearly doesn't know me as well as they think they do. But I'm not here to cause drama or unpleasantness, so let's let bygones be bygones. SpartHawg948 09:12, January 18, 2011 (UTC) You should definitly read some of edgar rice burroughs work whether tarzan, venus, pellucidar or mars. And when i checked his IP address it showed he was in maryland, but I have no idea were you are so it wasn't much help in determining if it was you or not. I am sorry about the accusations but our previous confrontations have somewhat soured my opinion of you in a similiar way that they have soured your opinion of me. I hope you contribute to this wiki, even though edgar rice burroughs work lacks the deeper levels that many other works have he makes up for it in adventure and completely insane,but lovable, characters. I have best heard john carter described as a homicdal maniac with hypomania. You will definitly notice similarities to modenr science fiction as Burroughs in a way created the genre, and be prepared to be disappointed in George Lucas even more (if that's possible) when you start recognizing familiar names and themes. ralok 18:50, January 18, 2011 (UTC) :As my user page on the ME wiki has shown for several years now, and as my user page on most wikis I contribute to will also show, I reside in California. I make no attempt to hide this, nor would I have denied it if you had asked me directly instead of merely accusing an anon of being me. Our previous exchanges have not soured my opinion of you. Please do not make comments to that effect without asking me first, as I'd rather people don't just make assumptions about me and what I think. If you ever suspect me of working against you, ask me. I will come right out and confirm or deny it. Please don't just fling around baseless accusations. I don't appreciate my name being sullied in such a manner for something I never did. :Now, as to the other part of the message. First, it was always my impression that it was the great Nineteenth-Century sci-fi pioneers such as Mary Shelley, Jules Verne, and H. G. Wells who created the sci-fi genre. There's a reason, after all, that Verne and Wells, not Edgar Rice Burroughs, are called "The Fathers of Science Fiction". After all, Verne wrote From the Earth to the Moon nearly fifty years before Burroughs started writing the Barsoom books. H. G. Wells' War of the Worlds, which was one of the pioneering sci-fi books involving Mars, and which influenced Barsoom, came out fourteen years earlier. I don't deny that Burroughs had an influence on the genre, but saying that he created it is... well, just plain wrong. Nor would I say that it's fair to put him in the same league as the pioneers of modern sci-fi, like Heinlein, Bradbury, Asimov, Herbert, and the like. IMHO, in the annals of sci-fi, Burroughs occupies a key supporting position to the luminaries and true pioneers. Anywho, the first few books were $1 for Kindle, so I got them, and will likely get around to reading them some time later this year, if I don't get sucked in by the Dune series by Frank Herbert first. SpartHawg948 20:53, January 18, 2011 (UTC) Im not trying to say that science fiction was created by him, far from it. The first science fiction story that i have ever read was the time machine and that was well before a princess of mars. The thing i am trying to say is that the way modern science fiction is, full of big heroes, bad science, and over the top action. This sort of formula was cemented by Burroughs. When I read Burroughs work it feels so far ahead of its time. It feels like it should be among star wars or star trek maybe stargate even, it feels modern. HE is more of a fantasy writer . . . hmmm, ok then I will describe it this way, he pioneered the SPACE FANTASY genre or maybe sword and planet. I like a lot of the older science fiction, Jules Verne, and HG Wells certainly inspired Burroughs, mars, pellucidar. But he treated the stories differently than they would have treated it if they wrote the same book. So what i am try to say is that he created how science fiction is often treated in the modern day. He was huge influence on star wars, and that. Ranking him among Heinlan and Bradbury (two of my all time favorites) is certainly more accurate than saying he is on the same rank as Wells and Verne (I am still confused on how Jules Verne knew there wouldn't be gravity in space) But Burroughs is definitely MY personal favorite because of one oddly specific reason, he connected much of his works, not very strong connections but strong enough to make me care that much more. I dont know of very much science fiction at the time that connected series like he did, tarzan, pellucidar, moon maid, venus, and mars, all connected. . . for absolutely no reason. WEll I hope that clarifies, like you avatar right now by the way. Im sorry about the mess with me accusing an anonymous user of being you incognito, and I never really thought to check your userpage to see were you were from, i will not accuse a random person without an identity of being you again (i would still like to know who that was) ralok 21:41, January 18, 2011 (UTC) :I think you missed the point of part of my comment though. I don't think it would be accurate to place Burroughs on the same level as Heinlein and Bradbury. I think Burroughs would be ranked just below those two, as well as Asimov, Herbert, and others. If we want to go multi-media, I think that Burroughs ranks below Lucas and Roddenberry as well. I think that, if the top rank is for pioneers of Sci-Fi, such as Wells, Verne, and Shelley, and the second rank is for innovators, the movers and shakers who took the early sci-fi and made it what it is today, people like Asimov, Heinlein, Herbert, Bradbury, Niven, Clarke, Gernsback, etc, then I think that Burroughs is most accurately placed on the third rank. He's certainly a big name in the field, and helped mold it somewhat, but not to the extent of, say, Frank Herbert. Sci-fi today might be a little different if Burroughs' works had never appeared, but no, in my opinion, significantly different. Certainly not as different as it would have been if novels like Dune, or Starship Troopers, or 2001: A Space Odyssey hadn't been written. :Is it a good story? Sure, maybe. (I haven't read it yet, so the jury is still out there.) Did it have some influence? Definitely. Did it have a major influence? In my opinion, no. Not really. But really, that's all it is. An opinion. Everyone is entitled to their own, and my opinion happens to be that we shouldn't attribute too much influence to Burroughs and his work. I'd put him on the same level as a John Hemry or William Keith. SpartHawg948 00:56, January 19, 2011 (UTC) See I would actually place Herbert above Heinlein and Bradbury. I would place bradbury and heinlan on the third rank as well. To me it really depends on how science their work effected the industry. To me science fiction wouldn't exist without Asimov, Verne, Or Wells. Science fiction wouldn't be the same without Herbert, Lucas, or Niven. And on the third tier, science fiction would still exist but not be AS good as it is now without Burroughs, Heinlan, or Bradbury. They make it better but not functional. Its like you can build a house and it can be magnificient, and you can have a guy wire the house, and then you help furnish it. And like i said, lucas definitely drew inspiration from Burroughs (either that or it is the greatest set of coincidences of all time), and Burroughs probably drew inspiration from Edwin Lester Arnold who wrote the only mediocre Gulliver on mars. From one not so good book to a great series that is ultimatly forgotten, to what is arguably the the greatest work of science fiction. So even though Burroughs didnt innovate the industry he certainly helped it along and helped make it what it is today. I base it more ability to inspire than I do on quality of work or influence, dont ask me to rank them on quality of work because I would put P.D. Eastmen at the top for go dog go which is only loosely science fiction at best ralok 01:25, January 19, 2011 (UTC) :But how would sci-fi not exist without Asimov? Are you telling me that, if Asimov didn't exist, all the sci-fi that was written before his time would cease to exist? Claiming that sci-fi wouldn't exist without a man who was born 101 years after sci-fi is generally credited with coming into existence is ludicrous. It's like saying that rock and roll music wouldn't exist without Metallica. Of course it would! It would be pretty different, but it would still exist. Same for sci-fi and Asimov, which is why Asimov is clearly second-tier, at least on my scale. Ditto for Herbert. It's not that his works aren't great, it's just that, as sci-fi was already an established genre by the time he came around, it just isn't possible to put him in the tier reserved for the founders of the genre. :As for Star Wars, this is literally the first time I've heard anyone claim that the works of Edgar Rice Burroughs influenced George Lucas in the slightest. It's common knowledge that Star Wars started as essentially a sci-fi remake of Kurosawa's The Hidden Fortress, and that later themes that were thrown in come mostly from classical literature, and are very common themes. I've literally never heard anyone claim that Lucas was influenced by Burroughs. I'm kind of flabbergasted here. Again, I agree that Burroughs influenced the field. But not nearly as much as so many other authors did, which is why he is a solid member of the third tier. :*Oh, and in a post-script - please, please, please do me one favor. It's Robert HEINLEIN. H-E-I-N-L-E-I-N. Not "heinlan". You say that Heinlein is one of your all-time favorites, and I know he's one of mine. So let's do him the courtesy of spelling his name correctly. It shouldn't be hard, especially since I do keep spelling it properly, literally showing you how to spell it. The man deserves at least that much respect. SpartHawg948 01:36, January 19, 2011 (UTC) Im so Sorry that I spell Heinleins name wrong (i probably spelled it wrong here). Its one of the many reasons that my book will be rejected by Macmillan books, my inexplicable inability to spell simple things. And I mean is that the greatness of the works helped carry the popularity of science fiction, it would exist but it wouldn't be the grand fortress it is today (also every time i read a story involving robots i tend to hear the term'asimov protocol') A dozen men can build a house, a hundred can build a village. My claim that George was influenced by Burroughs' mars is not so far fetched when you start reading the series. While story is not the huge influence he certainly drew influence from the world (either that or coincidences are afoot). The big thing is he seemed to take names from many aspects of barsoom bantha, sith, various types of Jeds. I'm sure there's more but that is just things that I can name at the top of my head. Well, these are just my opinions anyways, you seem to have alot stronger of reasons for how you rank your writers, and probably much fewer ranks than I have. ralok 01:50, January 19, 2011 (UTC) *I CHECKED MY COVER LETTER A THOUSAND TIMES BEFORE I SENT THE PACKAGE AS REQUESTED, I MISPELLED MACMILLAN ON THE FIRST LINE. AH GOD HELP ME, why didnt i check it a thousand and one times. Oh my god, its entirely hopeless now. ralok 01:59, January 19, 2011 (UTC) :(seriously? I was edit conflicted for that? Who needs to read that? Ever?) Banth is a stretch, though I suppose I can maybe see it. It's not a huge influence or anything, but sure. Sith, as I understand it, is generally believed not to come from the name for a giant bug in Burroughs' book, but from the Sith, a race of supernatural beings from Gaelic mythology, many of whom are powerful warriors and sorcerers, the most evil of whom make up the Unseelie Court of Sith. Which is more likely? That the Sith from Star Wars are named after giant bugs, or a race of malevolent warriors and sorcerers from ancient Scottish mythology? As for Jeds, I can see no connection with Star Wars. The name "Jedi" could just as easily have come from "Jidai" (Japanese samurai dramas, as there are clear connections between Jedi and Samurai), or from the "al-Jeddi", masters of spiritual chivalry in Sufi Islam (the connection between "spiritual chivalry" and the Jedi being obvious), or the Hebrew word "Yediah" meaning knowledge. Some influence. SpartHawg948 02:00, January 19, 2011 (UTC) But its odd that in a book that is of pretty much the same genre (space fantasy) that so many similiar terms would be clumped together. While you can later point the finger atthe source of these words to make it sound like the author had more inspiration it doesnt change these astounding coincidences. In my upcoming science fiction novel i have a ship named the khan and another named the hannibal. I can say that these ships are named after Genghis Khan, and Hannibal, son of Hamilcar Barca, to make myself sound more intelligent. Doesnt change the fact I named them after Hannibal Lector and Khan Noonien Singh. And has George ever come out and said where he got these names. You just assume that it has to have some high and grand influence from ancient mythology. This is getting into nerd fight territory here, so i am going to halt this conversation. ralok 02:09, January 19, 2011 (UTC) :Wow. This is getting ridiculous. Similar terms = a reference? Please! I point out much more likely references, and I get this non-answer in return? Brilliant. I missed this incisive commentary. We'd better call this quits, because I'm seriously reconsidering the merits of coming to this wiki, if this is what I can expect. I left the comment on Gnostic's page to clear my name, and I had hoped to be pretty much left alone after that unless I actually began contributing. I was willing to indulge this discussion for a while, but now it's just getting to be too much. I assume no more than you assume. You claim that I "assume that it has to have some high and grand influence from ancient mythology". And you assume that it must be a reference to Burroughs. You flat-out said that it was! Where is your statement from Mr. Lucas confirming where he got these names? Don't try and hold me to an impossible standard that you yourself are incapable of meeting. I must say, when I first saw this wiki, I was impressed with the site. I thought Gnostic was doing fine work. If this is the treatment I can expect now though, I may have been mistaken about the caliber of this site. SpartHawg948 02:31, January 19, 2011 (UTC) There is a book about space princess being kidnapped that contains all of these terms. And star wars is a movie about a space princess that contains all of these terms. And you are right, I am assuming this. I am assuming that this work had influence on george, rather than a bunch of unconnected disjointed random mytholigcal entities. It is safer to assume that he was influenced by the source with these thigns clumped together, than assuming that each word was influenced by something from a seperate mythological context. That is my opinion on it, and you will have no luck in changing it. ralok 02:36, January 19, 2011 (UTC) And i am not treating you badly, i am just disagreeing with your opinion on something in a conversation that is not really relevent to the content of the enyclopedia. You cannot change everyone to have your opinion. which is a common complaint towards you, you may want to analyze your behavior when it omes to that. You cannot change peoples opinions, you cannot force them down peoples throats. And i will make this clear, these are my own opinions on the subject, when it comes time (if the time comes) to list the influences Burroughs has had on the world I will not allow my opinions to permeate the article, I can promise you that. forgot to sign ralok 02:44, January 19, 2011 (UTC) :Of course not. Best to assume that random terms that have totally different meanings in two different works are related, instead of assuming that George Lucas applied a theme (and he has stated that mythology was a consistent theme with his works) and took bits and pieces from various elements of this theme. Way better to assume your way is right. Random terms meaning totally different things in totally different works must be related, right? But not terms with the same names that also have very similar roles within their respective works. Makes perfect sense. I'm reminded of a quote I heard a while back. "One you're convinced of the truth, not even the truth can convince you." You, sir, are convinced of the truth. You say as much when you openly admit to being closed-minded and unwilling to consider any possibility other than your preconceived notions. "That is my opinion on it, and you will have no luck in changing it." If you freely admit that your opinion will not be changed, then why even bother posting here? I personally like talking to people receptive to ideas and opinions other than my own, but that's just me... :In response to your most recent addition, why would I analyze my own behavior? At what time did I try to force my opinions down your throat? Though I must point out that of course opinions can be changed! I have had my opinions on a variety of subjects changed numerous times. If a person is receptive to outside information, then of course their opinion can be changed by the introduction of new facts and information. Stating that "You cannot change peoples opinions" is just laughable. I'm trying to end this amicably, so please, let's just let this go. SpartHawg948 02:49, January 19, 2011 (UTC) Also if i accused you of mistreating me on the mass effect wiki I would have at least gotten a warning. But you will get no warning because unlike the mass effect wiki your opinions are welcome here and will not be scoffed at unless they permeate the articles. ralok 02:49, January 19, 2011 (UTC) :I have never warned anyone for accusing me of mistreating them. The very fact that you would accuse me of behaving in such a manner is offensive. Go on there right now and find even one time I "warned" someone for accusing me of mistreating them. I can actually show you right now an incident earlier this week where I actually showed someone who stated his intent to have me stripped of my powers exactly what he would need to do to make it happen! Here's another though: Find me one time on this page where I accuse you of mistreating me. Please. :And don't bring the ME Wiki into this. You know why you were banned. It was for your reprehensible conduct and appalling comments directed towards other users and towards people with developmental and learning disabilities. The free exchange of opinions is welcomed on the ME Wiki, despite your attempt to claim otherwise. What are not tolerated there are vile and loathsome comments like the ones that got you banned. SpartHawg948 02:53, January 19, 2011 (UTC) And no you arent, you have repeatedly tried in this conversation, (and are still) trying to get your opinions out on top, I have only stated my opinions and my reasoning for my opinions, you have tried to shoot down or disprove my opinions. And I am perspective to new ideas, otherwise I would still believe that every single thing in star wars was inspired by something from a completely seperate mythology. While the content may have been inspired i firmly believe lucas first heard many of these words from teh Barsoom series, he may have applied more relevent information later, but notice in the first star wars not much was established about the sith other than a man in armor that made him look like a bug, and the jedi as holy knights. And you should constantly be analyzing your own behaviro so that you may better improve yourself in social situations, be critical of yourself otherwise you will just end up offending a disproportionally large amount of people and not understand why, or assume something was wrong with their behavior. ralok 02:56, January 19, 2011 (UTC) :Wrong. I have stated several times that these are just opinions, and you are as entitled to yours as I am to mine. I have not at any time tried to shoot down or disprove yours, merely to answer your opinions with my own. Let's see, shall we? "In my opinion, no. Not really. But really, that's all it is. An opinion. Everyone is entitled to their own, and my opinion happens to be that we shouldn't attribute too much influence to Burroughs and his work." (emphasis added) Clearly, what you see there is me trying to impose my opinion on you, right? To shoot down your opinion? No! You see me (quite literally) saying that all that I have said is my opinion, and that you are welcome to have your own! I don't care if your opinion differs from mine! Read my words, don't just see what you want to see! :And let's not forget, I have tried several times to just drop this. You are the one who keeps posting here, on my talk page, despite my clearly expressed desire that this stop. Yet I am the one accused of stalking? Right... Seriously, if all you are going to do is claim that I said things I never did, let's just end this. SpartHawg948 03:16, January 19, 2011 (UTC) :*And I'm still waiting for the times that I supposedly warned people on the ME Wiki for claiming I mistreated them, or for daring to have an opinion other than my own. I, on the other hand, still have the incident cued up where someone demanded to know how to strip me of my Bureaucrat powers and I told him exactly how to do it. Also still waiting for the times I claimed you mistreated me here. SpartHawg948 03:19, January 19, 2011 (UTC) I thought you might like to know This wiki was recently spammed for no apparent reason by a idiot fancying himself some sort of crusader for justice. Posing as lancer. he replaced a good many pages with . . . . very odd and innapropriate links (check theactivity feed here if you are curious) I have no idea what provoked this attack on this humble little wiki, I have no idea what he was trying to accomplish since I am already not exactly on good terms with the mass effect wiki and I disagree im some ways with how it operates. But understand this, I wont tolerate this kind of s'wit going around and trying to ruin the reputation of users who are just trying to make these sites good places. If you ever need people to come and back lancer up, or to prove that lancer is a good person and not this idiotic troll, consider me one of those people. Because when it boils down to it even though I may disagree with you and lancer, the three of us all want the same thing. Accurate, well written encyclopedias for people to get their information. Not stupidity. ralok 12:00, May 4, 2011 (UTC) :Apologies for the delay in responding. I almost didn't because of the past unpleasantness between us here and elsewhere, for which I apologize. Failing to respond would be childish and immature. You took the time to leave me this message, so I can take the time to give it my full attention and to respond to it. :I'd like to start by apologizing. I'm very sorry that your wiki was targeted by this vandal. I'd hoped (and please don't take this as a slight against you or this wiki, as it isn't intended as one) that this wiki would be small enough, or perhaps I should say obscure enough, that the vandal wouldn't come here and spread his bile. I was, regrettably, mistaken. This wiki is one of many that has been hit by a vandal who got his start on the ME Wiki, and who likes to impersonate Lancer1289 for the purposes of demonizing Lancer. You saw through this deception. Regrettably, others haven't, and Lancer has been the victim of numerous attacks on his talk page, one person going so far as to say "GO FUCK YOURSELF MOTHERFUCKER GO DIE IN HELL LIKE UR MOM DAD AND ALL UR FAMILY, DEVIL'S COCKSUCKER!!! JERK IDIOT!!!!!" (Apologies if I've violated any site policies in posting that. If so, let me know and I'll remove it.) As such, your kind words and offer are appreciated. I'll be sure to pass them on to Lancer. :In closing, I'll say this: The ongoing vandalism has caused me to reassess certain things, particularly about the behavior of certain users. I'm not promising anything here, so please don't assume that I am, but perhaps I acted a bit too rashly in imposing a permanent ban on you. Give me some time to mull it over, and that ban may be lessened, or possibly even removed. It's been about eight months now, which is a good deal of time, so perhaps something can be worked out. As I've said, this vandal has made me rethink what truly is and isn't permaban-worthy, so who knows? Maybe some good will come of this. We'll see. SpartHawg948 07:15, May 6, 2011 (UTC) okay . . . I am going to say this now while I am clear in the head UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES UNBAN ME! I am not ready to come back to the mass effect wiki. I may have made big improvements in behavior, and my editing skills may have become better . . . But I am not in the right mind to come back to the mass effect wiki. I cant say with any certainty that I wont revert back to being childish and petty, it hasn't been long enough in my opinion that the improved me is a permanent state of being . . . and a few times on other wiki's I have caught myself almost reverting back to my habit of being very difficult. People CAN change, but it takes a long time, and I am not quite there yet . . . If I had to choose a time to come back, it would be summer NEXT YEAR near the end . . . only after the mass effect ANIME is released (someone needs to defend what will probably be sub-par :P). Things are changing in my life, and I am a changing person. CHANGING, but not CHANGED completely . . . and not to mention not being distracted by the mass effect wiki (which for some reason occupies alot of my time) has really given me the chance to give some small wiki's a leg up, like this one and the thundercats wiki . . . when you banned me it was for the better of not just me, but the wikia network as a whole. So for the love of god, dont unban me because that could potentially undo all the progress I have made since then . . . ralok 08:00, May 6, 2011 (UTC) that was . . . far more honest about myself than most people EVER ARE . . . I still have no idea how he even found this wiki, ultra confusing to me. And I wasnt fooled for a moment btw, I may be a bit of a jerk and very difficult to work with. But I understand people, and I knew lancer wouldnt do that . . . also I saw the little thing above the letter L . . . . kind of a big give away . . . Like I said, if lancer ever needs back up I will gladly storm over to whatever wiki he was unjustly banned from and support him ralok 08:05, May 6, 2011 (UTC) :Fair enough. I'll keep that in mind while I think about this. I also passed along your words to Lancer. I'm sure he'll appreciate them. SpartHawg948 08:06, May 6, 2011 (UTC) James Vega That picture that everyone seems to think is james vega (new mass effect squad mate) IS NOT HJAMES VEGA, I just elt the need to point this out. Looking at the game informer article, that image is in the same white block talking about the husks and new variations of them in mass effect 3. It is on the same page, right above the orange block talking about the then james saunders, but it is in no way meant to be james saunders. It is very clear with the composition of the page. Just thought you would like to know ralok 17:37, May 11, 2011 (UTC) Sorry I messaged you, I just hate it when people insist upon something that is obviously false even at a glance. ralok 17:41, May 11, 2011 (UTC) :Yeah, that's what Lancer, myself, and quite a few others have been saying for weeks. It's also why that picture isn't in any of the articles relating to James Vega (James Vega, Characters, Squad, etc). SpartHawg948 23:25, May 11, 2011 (UTC) DONT CARE ABOUT KINECT FEMALE KORGAN EXSIST, THAT COULD HAVE BEEN THE HIGHLIGHT OF THEIR SHOW, just revealing that female aliens EXSIST, OH MY GOD I WISH WE GOT A BETTER LOOK AT HER, I bet she was pretty . . . even though her species is so radically different looking from humans :P maybe I am crazy ralok 23:07, June 6, 2011 (UTC) I need your help . . . badly I need your help . . . . .you probably know me better than anybody on wikia . . . . Remember when, that one guy made a mass effect wiki . . . and I supported you guys . . . . .even though I had no reason too. . . . you see, part of what I do on this wiki .. . is part of me trying to mature since I got kicked off the mass effect wiki . . . and . . . . well, the wikia staff did the same thing to me . . . that was done to your wiki by that spiteful user . . .. they have made a new wiki . . . for the content on this wiki . . . .and it is tearing me up inside . . . because I specifically made this wiki . . . so they wouldnt have to, and even at one point johncarter.wikia.com redirected too this wiki . . . just read my blog and my comments on this page http://johncarter.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:Ralok/Give_it_back . . . . . I would appreciate your support in the situation ralok 04:38, October 9, 2011 (UTC) :Fair enough. I'll take a look. I can totally relate to this situation, so I'll see what there is to see. Fair warning: It'll probably take a while. With our "impersonator" site, Wikia decided to give them time to change things, then when they didn't, Wikia did... nothing. Well, for a while, anyways. Eventually the site was deleted due to inactivity and the fact that the vast majority of their content was still a carbon-copy of our own site. Not trying to be a downer, I just don't want you to get your hopes up for a speedy resolution or anything. But yeah, I'll take a look. Also, voting has commenced on the ME Wiki on a proposed "Ban Review Panel", and if it passes, I intend to bring your case up. SpartHawg948 06:08, October 9, 2011 (UTC) I dont know if I should be unbanned . . . but it did prevent me from adopting sinbad.wikia.com . . . . and I really really really really wanted to make a wiki about the classic hero, I had just watched all the harryhousen films . . . . that was torturous that I couldnt write about them :P ralok 06:43, October 9, 2011 (UTC) a few things I have recently been going through mass effect and mass effect 2, and I noticed a lot of anomalies and strange things. as well I have made myself aware of the "deception issue". I would like to say I think the wiki is handling it well, including new information created by the book in as vague a way as possible and generally ignoring continuity errors (at least that is what it seems like is being done to me). There was a lot wrong with that book and handling it professionally must have been difficult. Also going through the pages, i had a thought there are many diseases mentioned but none of the diseases in the mass effect universe quite warrant full pages, so I wanted to suggest creating a composite page like the wiki does with entertainment, drugs, and background races. Concerning the anomalies I noticed in mass effect (1) there are two references to ammunition of some type before thermal clips were established. Wrex mentions in his story of combating the asari woman wasting all of his ammunition, and the alliance soldier at the listening post that is being attacked by the rachni mentioned pooling magazines. So just some stuff I wanted to say concerning mass effect! I wish you guys luck! A lot of new info coming in and you guys are about to hit 2000 pages, which is really an excellent achievement! ralok 05:40, February 21, 2012 (UTC) my defense for the ending hello, I wish to be unblocked at least temporarily to offer my defense for mass effect 3's ending possibilities, i feel the endings are getting way more criticism than they should be! Certainly the endings are not perfect (with synthesis having extremely absurd logic, which makes it in my opinion . . . a bonus ending in some ways!) but people are being waaaay to hard on mass effect 3's ending, including myself for a while until I put some reasonable thought into the ending! I simply wish to make a blog post, so I may defend mass effect 3's ending. and certainly, mass effect 3 wasnt perfect, certainly some parts were stronger than others, but the game is pretty much solid gold in my opinion, and even though the endings arent perfect . . . they deserve to be defended! It isnt like the Dragon Age 2 situation even, where there are a whole lot of points that you cant deny or are clearly backstabbing the original game . . . this ending is biowares choice, the writing serrounding the ending was superb, they admit that they didnt know what the crucible was capable of . . . and the limited choices presented at hte end .. . . it is actually pretty brilliant in alot of ways. It wasnt the ending people wanted, and that is what has many people mad . . . but memory serves me correct, the first thing I ever heard cocnerning mass effect . .. . many decisions lay ahead . . . none of them easy. ralok 01:11, March 11, 2012 (UTC)